Klipsch v2-400 Pro Media vs. 4.1 Pro Media

[denon]

Is the ONLY difference this: Pod Preamp

This is the way it looks to me, so if you buy the v2-400 speakers and want them to sound a LITTLE better, get the new preamp for $50 and you have the same set of speakers....

 

[rlism]

<<Revoiced crossover networks for both intense gaming and musical reproduction.>>

I think these are changes in the actual speakers. Slight revision.

 

[yo2tup]

what rlism said.

the revised crossovers fixes the mid-range problem that the v.2-400's had (or lack of). apparently it's a noticable over the the originals. i can't say yet because i'm still waiting for me 4.1's to arrive.

 

[denon]

...

 

[Insane3D]

Actually, the only difference is the preamp pods. The extra cost of the new preamp pods is why the new versions are $50 more. I spoke with Amy at Klipsch support whern they first came out and she said there was no difference in sound quality, just a slightly higher gain on the preamp. They are slightly louder and have the headphone jack, but that's it.

 

[mikef208]

So the only differance between the 4.1's and the v2.400's is this control pod thing. I don't need the headphone jack since I have one on my soundcard, nor do i need an MP3 connection, what else does it do.

 

[rlism]

&quot;these newer satellites have a revamped crossover network in them that results in a midrange section that seems more alive and full.&quot;

If any of you have ever opened up speakers or worked with crossovers you will see that most passive crossovers are contained in the speaker enclosures. The only instances where I've seen crossovers outside speakers are 2-piece tweeter/woofer (or 3 piece tweet/mid/woofer) car speakers w/o enclosures. These crossovers networks are NOT IN THE POD PREAMP. That would require 2 sets of positive and negative wires going to EACH satellite from the preamp pod. I also seriously doubt 4 crossover networks for 60w speakers would even fit inside a pod that already houses preamp controls and headphone jacks.

 

[mikef208]

So would I be better off with the v2.400's or the 2x2.1(4.2) setup?

 

[bgskier]

You would be best off getting the 4.1 system over both of them, they have them instock right now at www.planetminidisc.com for 299 + free shipping or EMS Computing has them for 224+ shipping, but they are on backorder for what they say is one week from now.


BG

 

[rlism]

Honestly, I'd rather have the 4.1's rather than two 2.1's.

I have the v2-400's now and 160 watts to one sub is plenty for me (believe me when I say it's enough, I'm a total bass-head). This way you get good clean 60 watt power to each satellite. Two 2.1's would only have 35 watts to each satellite and 130 watts to each sub. The two 2.1's would definitely give you more value/versatility if you are even considering using them in two separate systems.

 

[mikef208]

Let me get this straight, the v2.400's can be upgraded for 50.00 dollars, in the form of the control model, to make them the new 4.1 model?

 

[mikef208]

Well this should only be used on my primary system so it looks like I will be picking up a set of the v2-400's tomorrow. If I decide I want better midrange I can upgrade it right?

 

[rlism]

You can't upgrade. The satellites are different. Get the 4.1's. Seems like you can order them for cheaper than the v2-400 at EMS anyway.

 

[yo2tup]

mikef208

no, the 4.1's have the new control pod as well as the new crossovers which are not part of the control pod.

the 4.1's are NOT[/B just the v2-400 w/ the new control pod.

 

[mikef208]

so are the new crossovers worth it? What can i do about getting a center channel for DVD's?

 

[DJediMaster]

Definetly go with the 4.1 system. The reworked crossovers are worth it. I own the v2.400's and i can say that the midrange on these are lacking. As for a centre channel, the phantom centre is good enough with these in my opinion. check out the review at www.gamersdepot.com

 

[mikef208]

I just know that on most of the 4.1 setups I have heard, the music and stuff drowns out the vocals a bit.

 

[DJediMaster]

I have not heard the klipsch 4.1 system myself, but i own the v2.400's and i can say that the vocals on these aren't as pronounced as they should be..in music that is. The biggest downside of the original system was the lack of the midrange or the 'presence' of it. the new 4.1 system attempts to patch up this problem.

 

[rlism]

Klipsch speakers are reknowned/notorious for crisp yet harsh tweeters. It's cuz they use horn tweeters instead of the typical dome ones you find in most other brands. In addition, the woofer on the setup can handle a lot of power, so when you go and listen to a 4.1 setup they're likely gonna show off its capabilities. The combination of the pronounced tweeters and woofers are likely to drown out the midrange vocals. I personally don't turn the subwoofer dial past the first 1/3 towards its maximum setting, ditto with the volume.

It's honestly a matter of personal perference when it comes to speakers. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I chose not to buy Klipsch for my home theater setup because the tweets were just too harsh for my tastes.

 

[junthin]

The 4.1's are supposedly better than the 2.4's. However, only time will tell. And those people with 2.4's and now have the new 4.1's please give us your input. Thanks!

 

[AmyP]

Hi All!
This is Amy from Klipsch, dropping in for the first time to check out the buzz...

Insane3D:

&quot;I spoke with Amy at Klipsch support when they first came out and she said there was no difference in sound quality, just a slightly higher gain on the preamp.&quot;

I don't remember saying that, and I'm not sure why I would, but it is wrong!! The sound quality has definitely improved, with the crossovers in the sats for clearer midrange, and the improved channel separation in the preamp.

I hope that clears things up. Sorry if there was a misunderstanding!

--Amy
promediatech@klipsch.com

 

[mikef208]

So does amy think we should go with the 4.2 setup or would waiting for the 4.1 be better?

Also I recentlly got an email from Amy, I posted it in two threads, I guess I missed this one.

The biggest difference between the 4.1 and the 4.2 is the two separate subs, which tends to make it a little more complicated to use, but more flexible.

Sound-wise they are very similar. You will likely only hear a difference at very high levels. You'll get a little less output from the satellites, and a little more from the subs in a 4.2 configuration..

The specs for the 4.2 are double of the specs for the 2.1.

Thank you,

Amy Platt
ProMedia Tech Support
promediatech@klipsch.com

There it is.

 

[rlism]

Sorry, my previous post was edited.

 

[mikef208]

She can't get fired for telling the truth, thats her job.

 

[AmyP]

I don't have an opinion on which is better, the 4.2 or 4.1. You can't go wrong with either. I personally like the flexibility of the 4.2 better. I can use one set with my computer and one set with my TV or another device...or hook them both up together when I want surround sound. It's just more versatile.

But the 4.1 is nice because it's self contained, with one volume control pod. It's really a personal preference, and what you're going to use the speakers for that matters most.

--Amy
promediatech@klipsch.com